A Generalized Semiautomated Method for Seabed Geology Classification Using Multibeam Data and Maximum Likelihood Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson, F.; Douglas, K.; Li, Z.; Meijer, A.; Stacey, C.D.; Kung, R., and Podhorodeski, A., 2024. A generalized semiautomated method for seabed geology classification using multibeam data and maximum likelihood classification. Journal of Coastal Research, 40(1), 1–16. Charlotte (North Carolina), ISSN 0749-0208. This paper presents a GIS-based model to perform semiautomated seabed classification that can act as a first-pass, pseudoclassified surficial geological map. The user can then edit the output into a finalized map in less time than by manual classification. The model uses maximum likelihood classification with unsupervised classification through iterative self-organizing clusters. This model is fully contained within the ArcGIS software suite as a ModelBuilder workflow composed of geoprocessing tools and Python script tools. Model inputs tested include different combinations of multibeam echosounder–derived data: slope, backscatter, and terrain ruggedness. Furthermore, to test the assumption of Gaussian distribution of input data required for maximum likelihood classification, Box–Cox power transformations were applied to slope and backscatter data and were used as model inputs. To illustrate the performance of the model, two locations are highlighted as case studies: Milbanke Sound and Spiller Channel, located on the central coast of British Columbia, Canada. Association between model outputs and ground-truth classes was generally weak to moderate when measured using Cramér's V association scores. Overall, the slope and backscatter parameter model had the highest scores of association. Results from an overlay analysis comparing model outputs with user-confirmed polygons show that the slope and backscatter model performs best in regions with distinct changes in the hardness of sediments but that in fjord regions dominated geologically by steeper bathymetric change, the slope parameter model may perform better. However, all model outputs had difficulty delineating bedrock units. The model has the flexibility to identify certain seabed habitat features as well, including glass sponge reefs—biologically active bioherms that have led to marine protected area designations in other areas of British Columbia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".